Quote:
Originally Posted by signupdamnit
I find that part very difficult to believe along with some other aspects of Zimmerman's story. But like I said I do believe he was probably acting in self defense or he thought he was. If I were on the jury I would give serious consideration to convicting him just because I believe he is lying. I know it's nto supposed to work that way but unfortunately I don't think they give many other options other than that and acquittal.
I'm not sure which is worse. Convicting the guy for something he didn't technically do or letting him off completely when he likely slandered a dead child just to save his own ass.
It would have been so much better if he would have cut the bullshit, told the full truth and basically admitted, "Yeah I messed up. I was too overzealous. I thought he was a criminal. But I really did shoot him in self defense. Put me in jail for a few years but don't put me on Death Row. I'm sorry this happened and I apologize to his family but he could have acted differently himself."
|
I have said all along that the case really comes down to Zimmerman's story and how believable it it. I doubt he will take the stand so his attorneys must convince the jury that his account of what happened is accurate and credible. If they do that he could be in good shape. If the jury doesn't buy that he is in trouble.
I don't know that there is evidence to convict him of Murder 2, but the jury can opt to convict him of manslaughter which was likely the charge he should have been hit with to begin with.